MOST everyone was swept by the wave of public outcry over the display of state terrorism that killed scores of farmers and detained close to a hundred during that fateful morning of the 1st of April. The protestant church compound where the thousands of protesters sought refuge was under siege for a couple of days with people and food controlled while fully-armed state troops patrolled the surroundings.
These are all classic counter-insurgency moves – massacres and hamletting are devices that the Philippine military has mastered in their operations in the rural communities suspected of being part of the NPA mass base.
The counter-insurgency tactics were in full view in an urban area and in a major highway at that with no less than the supposed elected local chief executive ordering the command. Much of the public disgust is directed toward the governor but it is clear that there is a military hand behind all of these.
The fact-finding mission recently concluded correctly interpreted the events before and after the slaughter as a counter-insurgency operation. The presence of both police and military units in the area, the ensuing massacre, and terror tactics after, made it appear as if we were witnessing the same events in Lianga, Surigao del Sur last September. It mimics very closely the actual situation in many other rural indigenous communities under siege in Mindanao where more than half of the government’s military are now deployed.
The state propaganda released in the aftermath confirms as much. The protests were instigated by the armed wing of the communist movement according to them and their allies. It hews closely to the same pronouncements by the state after massacres occur in rural communities in the name of counter-insurgency operations. Their implied logic is that since they are allied with the armed left, they are fair game and deserve the full violence of the state.
What riled the general public was how such a vulgar display of state power was used to disperse the protesting farmers airing out legitimate demands for food aid in a time of drought. The specter of hungry farmers out in the streets with their sticks and stones mowed down by government guns remains a powerful image. They reflect solid public sentiment against an inefficient and callous government whether it be local and national. The quick response of showbiz personalities and the private citizens who initiated rice donations that now are being delivered to the protesting farmers in the thousands of sacks is a barometer of how the incident has help consolidate public opinion against the incumbent administration just a month before the national elections.
But it may be the case that the violent event had greater effect on us who saw the spectacle from afar. The communities were these farmers came from have been heavily militarized truth be told since these are areas where large-scale agricultural and mining expansion are currently taking place. They have lived with the reality of heavy military presence in their farmlands and communities hampering their economic activities and it is known that they have suffered through the assassination and even massacre of their leaders before. For them to stand up to all these by joining the mass action, including the possibility that they would be fired upon which lamentably took place, is a testament to their resolve and organization.
The Kidapawan massacre is an illuminating moment for a number of reasons. For one, it is a case of the civil war in the countryside bleeding into the center. It reveals that the pretense of democracy and civil rights are merely privileges reserved for a few under the regime of political warlords and the state military machinery bent on crushing the resilient insurgency. It uncovers the mad-dog attitude of the military and police in dealing with organized forces which betrays their insecurity more than anything else.
It is also in occasions like these, when the social economic contradictions reveal themselves to be so acute, that clear ideological lines are drawn. It is one that has always been there ever since but every so often, the deep divide between the Left and the pretending left is revealed. The incident provides such an occasion to expose those who would rather side with the brutal state political and military machinery and label this as progressive politics because they are incapable of assigning to farmers, peasants, and lumad the capacity to struggle for their interest.
As always, farmers, peasants, and the lumad have to rely on their collective strength and courage to secure gains for their shared interests even if it means meeting bullets with their bodies.